Tonight we continue our Champions League campaign against Lille.
Recently we blogged about how Mikel Arteta needs to approach the Champions League differently this year – rather than chasing perfection, he needs to rest and rotate his squad with the aim of just getting through, not winning the group stage.
To that extent, I expect to see a few changes against a Lille side currently sitting 2nd in Ligue 1.
The main two changes will be Mikel Merino and Viktor Gyokeres coming in.
With Kai Havert’s international injury scare, and his recent poor injury records, we need to continue managing his work load. That should see the German rested today, with Gyokeres getting a chance to perform up top.
Moving into midfield, Arteta has an abundance of choices. It is therefore essential that this season he rotates his midfielders, keeping them fresh. For that reason, Mikel Merino will surely get a start alongside either Declan Rice or Bruno Guimaraes.
I think Arteta would have gone with Martin Zubimendi alongside Bruno, but with the Spaniard having picked up a post-game training session injury, Merino will come in with Bruno or Rice in behind. Much of that later decision will depend on how Bruno is recovering from his slight knocks.
As a result of the midfield make-up, Myles Lewis Skelly will be pushed to left back.
With Piero Hincapie’s injury, we need to ensure that we wrap Riccardo Calafiori in cotton wool. Lewis Skelly can more than do a job at left back without us losing anything from the midfield.
Jurrien Timber will be given the first 60 minutes as he continues his rehabilitation, with Ezri Konsa and Gabriel inside him – although Arteta may also fancy giving Cristhian Mosquera a run out instead of one of the pair.
I would keep Noni Madueke on the left hand side – he did not have a bad game against Leeds and needs to grow in confidence as he will get a lot of game time in the coming weeks. On the right it will be Bukayo Saka, with Eberechi Eze potentially coming in for Martin Odegaard.
Maybe a little disjointed, but it should be enough to overcome Lille. And then it is on to the next one…
In other news, Manchester City have splashed the cash on yet another new lawyer.
According to The Lawyer, Mark Howard KC is now working alongside City’s other barristers, including Lord Pannick and Paul Harris KC.
We all know the delusion of Man City fans over this case, claiming the plan was to always lose the hearing so that they could take their evidence to a higher court. This new appointment shows it was all just a load of waffle and that they are now panicking.
You do not spend millions on another high-flying lawyer if you are confident about the defence your existing high-flying have already presented.
As the case continues to unravel, more and more interested parties will come out of the woodwork.
The SRA are already looking into the role of solicitors in the cover up, whilst both HMRC and the US Government could reopen old cases depending on the final verdict. Then you have the FCA who could look into Man City auditors, BDO. This on the back of Deloitte being exposed for helping Roman Abramovich’s dodgy dealings.
The initial Premier League case against Man City might be concluded within 12 months, but with an ongoing investigation for 2018-present day as well as the above potential investigations, aspects of the case could rattle on for years more. And none of it is good for City or the reputation of their owners.
It was brilliant news that Mikel Arteta has signed a new contract. Anyone that disagrees with this fact must hold some sort of grudge. Likely going back to Arteta snubbing them as a player when, as a grown man, they used to hang about the training ground begging for shirts to be signed.
So 2030. Another 4-years of challenging for titles under Super Mik Arteta. Another 4-years of trusting the process.
Arteta’s Arsenal are in the “WIN NOW” phase. The signings of Ezri Konsa and Bruno Guimaraes, two established Premier League superstars, highlight that Arteta is now building for the future. He wants glory. And it wants it this season. And next.
But this brings with it a risk.
As we have seen with Liverpool, if you do not prepare for the future you end up with a group of players all reaching the end of their peak at the same time. They will be on huge wages, which leaves you little budget to consider signing the “next big things” and what ends up happening is a few years in the wilderness whilst you rebuild a team, rather than a transition as 20-somethings take over from 30-somethings.
Manchester United have spent nearly 15-years in this wilderness following Sir Alex Ferguson’s (and theirs) last league title. It was a championship built on Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidic, Michael Carrick, Robin van Persie, Wayne Rooney and Patrice Evra. The majority of which were beyond 30, and all of which were nearing the end, or at the end, of their peak.
Arteta’s job over the next 4-years is not to only win now, but also to ensure that he does not go into the 30s with an ageing squad past their best, or handover a creaking squad to the next man.
So just how would Arteta’s current Arsenal look in 2030?
Is it too early to start thinking about your Christmas jumper?
Come 2030, David Raya will be 35. As a keeper who relies on reflexes rather than his frame, he will likely be at the end of his time with us. He may not even make it through to 2030. But coming through the wings we have Tommy Setford.
Now it is notoriously difficult to come through at a top team as a goalkeeper. You just do not get the game time to develop, to make your mistakes as you grow. That is why Setford’s loan deals, and patience, are going to be important.
Come 2030, Setford would be 24. Still young for a keeper. Hopefully he would have had 3 progressive loan deals under his belt (currently at Stevenage), the last of which being either in the Premier League, Bundesliga, or other top league. If he is good enough, he will get his chance.
Jurrien Timber will still only be 29 in 2030, as will William Saliba. Riccardo Calafiori and Piero Hincapié will be just 28 and Cristhian Mosquera 26. These guys will have plenty still left in the tank. There is also Marli Salmon who will be just 21…
Gabriel Magalhães at 32 might be coming to the end of his time, but then again he has never been a defender who has relied on his pace. You could easily see him playing through till he is 34 or 35 at the highest level. Likewise, Ezri Konsa will also be 32. We do not really need to think too much about succession planning for these guys as those mentioned above will still in in their late 20s. Succession planning for the defence will probably start in 2030, not need to be done by.
In midfield, Martin Odegaard will be 31. I would not be surprised if he leave us before 2030. Maybe even next summer. Eberechi Eze (32), Mikel Merino (34) and Bruno Guimaraes (32) will likely all be either gone, or in their last season.
That will still leave us with Declan Rice (31), Martín Zubimendi (31), Myles Lewis-Skelly (24) as midfield options, with Bukayo Saka (29), Christos Tzolis (28) and Max Dowman (20) as attacking options. Despite being just 28 in 2030, I expect Noni Madueke to have departed to make way for Dowman.
Up front it is a bit more tricky. Kai Havertz will be 31 and Viktor Gyokeres 32. I would be very surprised if either are still with us in 2030.
So lets now look at 2030/31. What would be the starting XI based on players currently with us who would still have plenty to give. And where do we need to look to recruit?
Declan Rice would be the only man in our 2030/31 that would be over 30, and he would be just 31. With his footballing brain, playing a more static role, or even going back to centre back, would be an easy transition for Rice as his legs go.
Then backing the above up, we would still have the likes of Zubimendi, Salmon, Hincapie, as well as Gabriel or Konsa as an “older” option at just 32. This leaves us, in the next 4 years, to only really need to recruit a new right back, central midfielder, Odegaard replacement, left winger and two strikers.
Arteta can be in his win now phase because most of his players are all just entering their peak. There is not a huge amount of succession planning needing to be done. Much of it is already done. And the reast will happen naturally as we improve our squad year on year rather than having to buy the future.
Looking to the future, the big question now is “what will Man City’s punishment be?”. Before we get to that, Man City have until Friday 2 October to appeal. They will appeal. And their “irrefutable evidence” seems to be that money given to sponsors was from the Abu Dhabi (AD) government, and not Man City’s owners, Abu Dhabi United Group.
Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan is the founder of ADUG, who own 81% of Manchester City.
He is also a current vice president and deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates, as well as the minister of presidential court and member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi. He is the brother of the current president of the UAE, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and is married to Sheikha Manal bint Mohammed Al Maktoum, daughter of Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai.
Previous leaks of internal documents show that the Abu Dhabi government manages the accounts belonging to ADUG. ADUG insists it is separate from the Abu Dhabi government. This will be key, but only for some of the charges.
So what will Man City’s punishment look like?
Breaching Premier League Profitability and Sustainability regulations (2015-2018)
Manchester City have been found guilty of 114 breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules. 7 of those cover a breach of the Premier League Profitability and Sustainability regulations between 2015-2018.
Whilst the 7 charges may be the one of the smallest, they are perhaps the easiest to judge and may be in the most impactful. They are also an aspect of the case that Man City’s irrefutable evidence can not defend.
In recent years, Everton got a 10-point deduction for a PSR breach. This was reduced to 6-points on appeal as they self-reported the breach. A second breach saw them get a 2 point deduction. Nottingham Forest have also received a four-point deduction for breaching Premier League profit and sustainability rules.
So that sets the baseline for a breach at 2-10 points, with mitigating circumstances including how much they breached the rules for, whether they self-reported, and whether they cooperated with the Premier League. We can strike those last two off as we know City did not report themselves, nor did they cooperate.
The 7 breaches cover 3 seasons. You do not get multiple point deductions for multiple breaches in a season. They are batched together when the authorities consider the severity of the breach. So for the 3 seasons of PSR breaches, I would expect a point deduction of 18 to 30 points minimum (IE along the lines of Everton’s biggest punishment, and what it was reduced to on appeal).
History as shown that PSR breaches lead to point punishments and not financial punishments.
Failure to provide accurate financial reports for player and manager compensation (2009-2018)
14 of the breaches are a failure to provide accurate player and manager payments. We already know at least one of these relate to Roberto Mancini’s “double contract”.
ADUG will continue to maintain that having two separate contracts with two separate organisations is perfectly fine. That Mancini, and others, were paid by ADUG for their employment by Man City, and then paid separately for consultancy work outside of Manchester City.
Over the years there have often been rumours similar to this.
When David Beckham, for example, joined Real Madrid, there were rumours that Adidas were “covering” part of his salary as they wanted their most marketable player to be playing for their most marketable team. No evidence of this ever existed and it was always just paper talk / internet rumours.
There is, however, evidence of Mancini’s contract. And I imagine evidence of other contracts have been found.
If Man City can not definitively prove that the contracts were completely separate, the additional payments will be added to those years for PSR / FFP reporting. If that creates an new breach in a new season not already accounted for, it will see the above punishment for PSR breaches extended beyond the initial 3 seasons.
Additional punishments will likely come in the form of huge fines.
Chelsea were recently fined £10m by the Football Association for breaching rules relating to payments to agents between 2009 and 2022 and handed a suspended two-window transfer ban.
Now it has to be remembered that Chelsea self-reported, the irregularities were with the previous owner, and they cooperated with the authorities. None of this applies to Man City.
But the precedent set here is that fines and (potentially) suspended transfer bans can be given out for failing declare payments.
So we will see those payments applied to previous seasons, point deductions if this leads to a FFP / PSR breach, fines and a likely transfer ban.
Failure to provide accurate and up-to-date financial information (2009-2018)
Sponsors received financial grants from AD which enabled them to pay Man City over market value for deals. That is not for discussion. What is for discussion is the relationship between AD and ADUG. Are they basically two different limbs on the same body?
If yes, the charge stands. If Man City’s irrefutable evidence distances them enough, then the charges may fall.
As above, if the charges stand, the first ask will be to remove the increased revenue from Man City’s income sheet for those years. this will likely lead to further PSR / FFP breaches for those years. The result will be point deductions.
For those seasons where point deductions have not already bee applied, it will be no deductions. For those where they have already been applied, the point deduction may increase if the PSR breach significantly increases.
As with the player and manager compensation, the authorities will also likely look to hand over a big fine and further transfer window ban (potentially suspended) to punish this act.
Whilst it might be 54 charges, this will not equate to 54 x 6 or 10 for PSR breaches. The points deduction will be per season of the breach, not the total breaches within a season. The extent of the breach per season is what will determine how many points per season.
Failure to comply with UEFA’s regulations, including Financial Fair Play Regulations
Probably the least important charge as it relates to UEFA and not Premier League.
Unlikely that the Premier League will be able to do anything here beyond passing the information across to UEFA for them to investigate.
Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations (2018-2023)
Finally, perhaps the most charges with the biggest unknown quantity.
In previous charges to clubs, they have been rewarded for cooperating with the authorities. This has led to reductions in point deductions and transfer window bands being suspended. Man City have not cooperated throughout, nor have they shown any remourse.
Even if the irrefutable evidence defends some of the charges, it does not bat away this charge. This charge is all about Man City failing work with the Premier League, witnesses not appearing to give evidence, supposed evidence not being submitted, and Man City doing everything they could do block the Premier League’s investigation.
The result will be there are no mitigating circumstances. Punishments will not be reduced on appeal. Bans will not be suspended. But there is a 2nd unknown quantity to this. What happens to those individuals who failed to cooperate or lied?
Football banning orders could be handed out to those Man City executives and employees who failed to cooperate with the investigation, who actively blocked it, and who lied. This could be anywhere between a year or two, all the way through to a life ban from all football activities. We saw this in Italy with Juventus recently.
So we could be in a situation where the owners of Man City, the chairman of the club, CEO, and other executives could be facing some sort of ban for the irregularities and their failure to cooperate. This could be huge.
So far, I have not spoken about “expulsion from the Premier League”. I do not think there is a precedent for this for PSR breaches or financial irregularities. This causes a headache as it is not relegation, and therefore the Championship have no automatic obligation to take an expelled team. That is why the most likely punishment will be points leading to relegation, rather than expulsion.
Expulsion, however, is on the table if Man City do not disassociate themselves with any banned executives.
It will be clear, you either terminate the contracts of the banned execs, or you will have your will be suspended from playing football in England until you do so. And that will automatically create the expulsion. This is further complicated if it is the owners, ADUG, who are found to have lied and failed to cooperated.
If ADUG are found culpable, we may see the Premier League attempt to remove them as owners of the club. that is the only way an expulsion of owners can work. And it will be similar to what we saw with Roman Abramovich.
City owners will have a period to sell the club, likely to be by the end of the season. If they do not do so, the club will be suspended. This nuclear option will only be if ADUG are found guilty. The likelihood will be that they will find some senior executives within Man City to pin the blame on (huge pay outs to them), they will be suspended, removed from their positions, and ADUG will then employ new execs.
HMRC punishment
It is unlikely there will be any punishment handed out by HMRC to Man City. As far as I can see, all income was declared. This is where this case differentiates to Juventus’, where it was a criminal case led by the legal authorities (In English terms, submitting false accounts to Companies House).
HMRC may look to go after those who received payments.
If the those payments were for football activities in England, those who received them would have had a duty to declare them. They will likely not have declared them. That will be on those individuals.
Club by club legal action
Everton v Burnley has set a precedent that allows clubs to sue another club for loss of earnings.
The the Burnley case, the Clarets showed that they would likely have stayed up had Everton not breached PSR. The result was a pay out, plus interest, on the money they missed out on by being relegated. This is where the floodgates could open.
Lets firstly look at the 3 seasons where we know there are PSR breaches: 2015/16, 2026/17 and 2017/18. Now lets be cautious and apply just a 6 point deduction to each of those seasons. That deduction will mean that anyone who would have finished above City had the deduction been applied in that season has a case.
Now in some cases, the compensation may be minimal – just the difference in Premier League merit money. But if the deduction would led to a team qualifying for Champions League football ahead of them, the compensation could be huge.
2015/16: Man City finished 4th, level on points with Manchester United, 3 points ahead of Southampton (WTF?), 4 ahead of West Ham and 6 ahead of Liverpool. Manchester United could have a claim for missing Champions League football, whilst Southampton and West Ham could claim for merit payments. If the deduction is more than 6 points, Liverpool would have a claim for missing Europa League football.
2016/17: Man City finished 3rd, 2 points ahead of Liverpool in 4th and 3 points ahead of Arsenal in 5th. Man U in 6th were 9 points behind. Arsenal would therefore have a claim that Man City’s cheating lead them to failing to qualify for the Champions League, whilst Liverpool would have a merit payment argument.
2027/18: Man City won the league by 19 points. Unless the point deduction applied for this season is huge, not much will happen.
My estimate is that for these 3 seasons along, Man City would be looking at over £100m in compensation. Maybe closer to £150m. And the impact could be far greater if the financial charges lead to PSR breaches beyond those 3 seasons.
So Man City’s punishment?
Well done for getting this far. I appreciate it is a long read.
Off the bat, I expect:
18-30 point deduction for PSR breaches
Huge fines for financial irregularities
Further point deduction if financial irregularities lead to new or more severe PSR breaches
Banning of those officials involved in the cover-up
Transfer ban, none suspended
£100-150m compensation paid to clubs (legal cases pending)
My final thought on this is the Premier League are still investigating 2018 onwards, and Man City once again are not cooperating. This may lead to larger fines, transfer bans and suspensions, suspended on cooperation in these cases. If Man City fail to cooperate, then these will kick in.
The Premier League may also hit Man City with a expulsion order, suspended for 4 years based which will only trigger if they fail to cooperate during that period. This could be the biggest charge of all as that will force Man City to cooperate with the 2018-2025 investigations of be expelled.
And if they cooperate and similar offences are found, further breaches, compensation, etc will be applied for those 7 years, and further or longer bans handed out.
For now, we await the appeal. And that appeal is due to be heard for a period of around 12-weeks. Then we will hear the punishment, which in itself will be appealed. But with no mitigating circumstances, no remorse, and Man City continually trying to block the investigation, any appeal will likely fall on deaf ears.
